Page 2289 - Week 11 - Wednesday, 1 November 1989

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .


The committee appreciates that Mr Da Deppo is keen to ensure he meets any obligations relating to current environmental controls and congratulates him for the sensitivity he has shown in organising the aquarium display, of which the city of Canberra will undoubtedly be proud.

Paragraph 10.4 states:

The committee during its investigation found no irregularities on the part of any party, including the developer and its proponent Mr Geoff Da Deppo in relation to any matters.

I have no doubt that in this and in a whole range of other matters the claims that are repeated from time to time in our community, most recently by the president of the Residents Rally, will clearly be shown to be spurious and false. The message is that this administration, both before this Government came into existence and since Rosemary Follett became Chief Minister, has been sound. There is no question about that. So these people who stand up in the public domain and make all sorts of claims should take the message and think before they make claims and see that what they say has some basis.

What instigated this report? First of all it was claims and questions about the lease. There was something fishy about it, to make a pun. Then later there were claims about potential environmental damage. Well, our very careful examination of all the papers shows that everything was properly done. It was completely in accordance with procedures. The committee has recommended one or two relatively minor changes or steps so that the public might be better aware of what is happening, but our exhaustive inquiry into all the documents found everything was quite proper.

Secondly, the environmental consequences caused comment, and this is now the major factor that worries us. Senator Richardson may yet require an environmental study. If so, he will be doing a retrospective act. If so, he will be admitting to an error on the part of a department which he did not administer at that time, because nothing has changed since the lease approval was given. Nothing has changed. Mr Humphries has pointed that out. The evidence in the documents makes that very clear. There has been no change since the lease was given. Mr Da Deppo has a current application, about which we make some comment. So if Senator Richardson does go ahead he will be showing a severe criticism of officers now in his department.

What if Senator Richardson decides that the development should not proceed? What is he going to do? Will he dismantle the site, bring in the jackhammers and knock all the concrete out and compensate Mr Da Deppo? We appreciate Senator Richardson's genuine concern for the environment. I have no doubt about that.


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .